I suspect that at some point in the past, a user without permission to submit a form could actually access the full form and fill in fields before being presented with a message that they had no permission to submit the form. The current solution (that they don't get to view the form fields) is certainly a better in terms of UX, but the node/add/webform "help text" for these settings is less clear (I'm assuming it's outdated), since it currently indicates only that users of the selected roles will be allowed to submit the form. I think this text (and related texts, elsewhere) could better match the error message a user without the correct role would see (i.e. 'You do not have permission to view this form.')
The goal of the attached patch is to better indicate, in the admin (create webform) interface the result of these permissions, especially since (for many use cases) the result of using these permissions is adequate without need for any additional access control modules.
Note: This patch was created against the 7.x-3.9 version as it did not seem there was a "dev" version available for Git checkout, but I think it should be back-ported to the 6.x branch, too.
| Comment | File | Size | Author |
|---|---|---|---|
| #3 | webform_access_submit_UI_fix-v2.patch | 3.36 KB | lomo |
| webform_access_submit_UI_fix.patch | 3.67 KB | lomo |
Comments
Comment #1
quicksketchThanks these are good suggestions. You're quite right that we used to always show the form, even if the user couldn't actually submit it. Then we later removed the form entirely if the user did not have access to submit it.
All of these changes seem good, though this bit a bit overly verbose:
Sometimes less is more when it comes to help text.
Comment #2
lomo commentedHi, Nate,
You're right. It is a bit too verbose. Trim as you please... or perhaps:
"Users who don't have the checked privileges will only see the form Title and Body fields; the actual form fields will not be visible."
I included more info to try to clarify the behavior that site admins should expect to see when testing the form. But I agree, too much text and users might not read it. ;-) (The reason I included so much detail was actually to help them determine whether they need another "access module" or whether the "default behavior" would satisfy their requirements.)
I'm not in front of the computer with the original patch, but will make this edit and re-submit (a bit later today).
Lowell
Comment #3
lomo commentedApologies for the delay. Attached is a patch which should work and makes that paragraph much more succinct (as above).
Comment #4
quicksketchOkay continuing to nitpick (but hey, that's what help text is all about):
This change leaves no help text available that is actually helpful. I'd prefer to leave it as-is.
What if we just called this "Form access"?
The new help text is not accurate. Not all nodes have body fields, and you can use CCK or Field module to add additional fields to the node type.
Comment #5
quicksketchAfter reading over this patch again, I'm not sure that the new text is any better than the existing text. I'd prefer to leave this as-is, sparing translators the rewording of everything.